Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 October 2020 | Story Prof John Mubangizi | Photo Sonia du Toit
Prof John C Mubangizi is Dean: Faculty of Law, University of the Free State.

South Africans are sick and tired of corruption. They are angry, frustrated and despondent. And they have every reason to be. South Africa has many problems: crime, unemployment, poverty, gender-based violence, inequality, low economic growth and now – in common with many other countries – COVID-19. The list goes on and on. What makes corruption the biggest threat among all these is that it cuts across all of them and impacts on their gravity in different ways. 

The South African Constitution envisages a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights. The way things are going, that society is never likely to happen. That is because corruption has been, and continues to be, the greatest threat to any possibility of realising that constitutional dream. In South Africa, like everywhere else where corruption is rampant, it occurs both in the public and private sectors, where it affects democracy and human rights by deteriorating institutions and diminishing public trust in government. It impairs the ability of government to fulfil its obligations and ensure accountability in the delivery of economic and social services like healthcare, education, clean water, housing, and social security. This is because corruption diverts funds into private pockets – which impedes delivery of services – thereby perpetuating poverty, inequality, injustice and unfairness. The problem is aggravated when government is the main culprit. “Government” here, of course, refers to the dictionary meaning of the term, namely, “the group of people with the authority to govern a country or state”.

Corruption existed in ancient Egypt, China and Greece

There are those who argue that corruption is as old as mankind and, therefore, it is here to stay. Indeed, corruption is known to have existed in ancient Egypt, ancient China and ancient Greece. In Robert Bolt’s 16th Century play A Man for All Seasons, Richard Rich’s opening remark is “But every man has his price.” In the 1836 play The Government Inspector, Nikolai Gogol cleverly satirised the human greed, stupidity and extensive political corruption in Imperial Russia at the time. And in a recent article in The Conversation (28 August 2020), Steven Friedman wonders why South Africans express shock at corruption when “it is perhaps the country’s oldest tradition.” He locates the advent of corruption in South Africa at the arrival of Jan van Riebeeck in 1652, through to the ensuing colonialism and apartheid. He argues that in reality, “corruption has been a constant feature of South African political life for much of the past 350 years. It is deeply embedded and it will take a concerted effort, over years, not days, to defeat it”. 

Agreed, but does it have to be that way? At the time of Jan van Riebeeck and during the 350 years of colonialism and apartheid, we did not have the legal framework that we have now. Here is a brief overview of that framework.

Read full article here

Opinion article by Professor John C Mubangizi, Dean: Faculty of Law, University of the Free State


News Archive

UFS academic speaks on Islamic terrorism
2012-09-12

 
 Prof. Hussein Solomon

Senior Professor Hussein Solomon from the Department of Political Studies and Governance at the University of the Free State (UFS) says it is imperative that we understand how ordinary Muslims are socialised, violently radicalised and primed to engage in acts of terror.

He was speaking at the Inter Religion Forum in the Faculty of Theology on the topic, “The rise of Islamist fundamentalist thought”.

According to Prof. Solomon, “The war on terror is truly a struggle between competing ideologies, after all, before a suicide bomber detonates his/her vest he/she must be ideologically indoctrinated to believe that what he/she is doing is the ‘right’ thing both in terms of the act and target.” Prof. Hussein, however, assured that the pure teaching of Islamic is not in favour of terrorism and killing.

Most of the twentieth century witnessed an ideological struggle between freedom and democracy. According to Prof. Solomon, “democracy” won that struggle. “The ideological struggle between freedom and authoritarianism is, however, far from over and thus we witness a clash of two competing ideologies across the globe,” he said.

He added that this is not an inter-civilizational conflict. “It rather is occurring within Muslim societies and between radical Islamists and the West.”

“A major battle is taking place in Islam between moderates, who in my view are the real Muslims, and the Islamo-fascists. Non-Muslims cannot simply regard this battle as an internal struggle. They need to support the moderate Muslim actively.”

“Should moderate Muslims lose this struggle, a clash of civilisations will become inevitable and the future will resemble a world of a war of all against all,” Prof. Solomon said.
 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept